On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 01:29:42PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:56:10PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > * double accounting.
> > @@ -501,8 +528,29 @@ iter_add_next_cumulative_entry(struct add_entry_iter
> > *iter,
> > {
> > struct perf_evsel *evsel = iter->evsel;
> > struct perf_sample *sample = iter->sample;
> > + struct cumulative_cache *ccache = iter->priv;
> > struct hist_entry *he;
> > int err = 0;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Check if there's duplicate entries in the callchain.
> > + * It's possible that it has cycles or recursive calls.
> > + */
> > + for (i = 0; i < iter->curr; i++) {
> > + if (sort__has_sym) {
> > + if (ccache[i].sym == al->sym)
> > + return 0;
> > + } else {
> > + /* Not much we can do - just compare the dso. */
> > + if (ccache[i].dso == al->map->dso)
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> > + }
>
> hum, do we want to prevent recursion totaly?
> how about intended recursion?
ugh... just managed to read the whole patch,
please forget above comment ;-)
>
> also should the dso be checked together with sym?
> because the symbol is defined like dso::sym
>
> jirka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
